VRTGX vs. EMCAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX) and Empiric 2500 Fund (EMCAX).
VRTGX is managed by Vanguard. It was launched on May 25, 2011. EMCAX is managed by Empiric Funds. It was launched on Nov 6, 1995.
Performance
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VRTGX Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares | -2.79% | 12.97% | 15.26% | 18.80% | -26.30% | 2.82% | 34.81% | 28.84% | -9.21% | 22.27% |
EMCAX Empiric 2500 Fund | -0.57% | 2.37% | 13.89% | 12.43% | -16.06% | 16.07% | 27.81% | 19.10% | -4.64% | 21.82% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, VRTGX achieves a -2.79% return, which is significantly lower than EMCAX's -0.57% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with VRTGX having a 9.83% annualized return and EMCAX not far behind at 9.61%.
VRTGX
- 1D
- 4.27%
- 1M
- -7.24%
- YTD
- -2.79%
- 6M
- -1.59%
- 1Y
- 23.68%
- 3Y*
- 12.32%
- 5Y*
- 1.34%
- 10Y*
- 9.83%
EMCAX
- 1D
- 2.60%
- 1M
- -6.15%
- YTD
- -0.57%
- 6M
- -1.03%
- 1Y
- 6.53%
- 3Y*
- 8.52%
- 5Y*
- 2.22%
- 10Y*
- 9.61%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
VRTGX has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than EMCAX's 1.96% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
VRTGX vs. EMCAX — Risk / Return Rank
VRTGX
EMCAX
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX) and Empiric 2500 Fund (EMCAX). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| VRTGX | EMCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.94 | 0.41 | +0.52 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.46 | 0.72 | +0.73 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.09 | +0.09 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.54 | 0.74 | +0.80 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.21 | 3.00 | +2.21 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| VRTGX | EMCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 | 0.41 | +0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 | 0.12 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.40 | 0.48 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 0.44 | +0.02 |
Correlation
The correlation between VRTGX and EMCAX is 0.89, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Dividend Comparison
VRTGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, more than EMCAX's 0.13% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VRTGX Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares | 0.73% | 0.57% | 0.62% | 0.85% | 0.78% | 0.54% | 0.53% | 0.90% | 0.85% | 0.75% | 1.07% | 0.84% |
EMCAX Empiric 2500 Fund | 0.13% | 0.13% | 0.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.51% | 7.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VRTGX drawdown since its inception was -41.97%, smaller than the maximum EMCAX drawdown of -51.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VRTGX and EMCAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| VRTGX | EMCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.97% | -51.81% | +9.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.80% | -10.15% | -4.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.48% | -30.60% | -9.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.97% | -42.79% | +0.82% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.16% | -6.22% | -4.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.53% | -13.33% | +2.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.36% | 2.50% | +1.86% |
Volatility
VRTGX vs. EMCAX - Volatility Comparison
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX) has a higher volatility of 8.82% compared to Empiric 2500 Fund (EMCAX) at 5.42%. This indicates that VRTGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMCAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| VRTGX | EMCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.82% | 5.42% | +3.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.59% | 10.49% | +6.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.39% | 17.50% | +7.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.53% | 18.18% | +6.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.45% | 20.21% | +4.24% |